Paper: Identity precense and knowledge building: Joint emergence in online learning environments? by Fengfeng Ke, Alicia F. Chávez, Pei-Ni L. Causarano and Antonio Causarano

The reason for why I choose this paper is because of its focus on student identity in TEL spaces. I believe, in accordance with the authors of this paper, that absence of learners’ identities can be a block to learner-learner interaction and feedback within TEL spaces. In addition, the research method being at least partly qualitative appealed to me. The methods section is extensive, which I appreciate. I often find qualitative approaches sparsely declared, which can be explained by its more fussy characteristics that quantitative approaches. However, for the same fussiness reason, I believe it even more important to be ambitious when declaring qualitative approaches. Potentially, I could use this paper as reference when declaring my research approach. Or, if not this paper specifically, its methods section is filled with references which I could explore in a search for methods references. The combination of quantitative and qualitative approach in this paper offers a pronounced view of the explored subject. Unfortunately, as in so many studies, only typed discussions in fora have been explored. Other media would have been interesting to compare, but might be the scope of another study.

Findings include identity presence being expressed in learning interactions, and not in interactions of (only) socializing purpose. Further, identity presence was found to be related to knowledge sharing and egocentric elaboration (elaborating one’s own arguments etc.). Hence, a challenge is stated to be to cater for identity presence in higher level knowledge building. I think there are implications of the results in diverse areas. Self-evidently, educators could consider the results and conclusions when designing study situations. More in line with my own area of interest, system designers should give more attention to create opportunities within TEL spaces for student identity expression. I have often experienced a lack of personality within TEL-spaces, making me feel as if I was all alone within the space, even though I have known others was there at the same time. Hence, I find it surprising that identity in online educational space is claimed in the paper to have been explored to a limited level. How come? Is student identity covered within other areas (e.g. research on social software)? That is the first question that I would like you to consider (well, even though it is stated as two questions I will call it as one).

Not surprisingly, the second question I will prompt you to explore is: What are your ideas and experiences regarding identity presence in TEL spaces?